The truth will eventually come out on the issue of so-called "man made climate change", or whatever the current euphemism is for the future and its enemies (thanks, Virginia Postrel), and it'll be really ugly for Mr. Gore and his disciples. People get angry when they find out they've been suckered.

Between Global Warming rocketing us to a frozen oblivion and the Hadron Super Collider creating a galaxy eating black hole sucking all life into a swirling abyss of compressed black matter I am relying on the Obamessiah to lead us through a tear in the space/time continuum to the safety of an alternate universe...

Gore is a poor activist for a legitimate issue. And the issue is NOT global warming. The issue is ecological genocide and resulting biochemical changes worldwide.

Obviously if you turn a rich forest into a parking lot for gas guzzling cars it will be warmer there than it was when that area was forested.

But the problem isn't an increase in local temperature. The problem is the destruction of all that ecology and it's light absorbing, carbon eating and oxygen producing qualities. And the replacing of it with light reflecting, oxygen consuming and carbon expelling engines.

"Obviously if you turn a rich forest into a parking lot for gas guzzling cars........"

...except that the United States has more forested land area than in 1900. And lo and behold, a casual observation of a graph of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere shows a distinct annual sawtooth pattern. This was shown in an intrernational environmental law class I took in law school. When the prof. asked what that was all about, the journalism and English majors in the class stared blankly. Prof. Gaines wasn't expecting the answer (summer in the northern hemispere) because no one had ever answered him in five years of teaching that class.

The ecological damage in the U.S. has been substantially repaired. It is in poor and developing countries that the worst is happening. Quit picking on cars until you get the science right, my friend.

I see you have replaced your "sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids" notion with an equally nutty theory.

On your point, Mr. Fagan is correct: North America is a net carbon sink (West coast CO2 > East coast CO2) because the re-foresting has increased the board-feet of living lumber above pre-euro rape and pillage levels.

Fred: Look, I didn't say we wouldn't get our hair mussed. Sure there are problems, but swamps in Louisiana and tidal estuaries in California are not big time players in the carbon cycle.

Your point actually makes a very strong case against Global Warming Bullcrap (GWB). There are many more environmental problems that are known today are actively killing species, humans and habitat on land and in water. Putting the bulk of our limited environmental budget into a potential problem is stupid and immoral.

North America is a net carbon sink (West coast CO2 > East coast CO2) because the re-foresting has increased the board-feet of living lumber above pre-euro rape and pillage levels.

This assertion, that because there is more forest in North America now than there was a hundred or even four hundred years ago, North America is a carbon sink, is patently absurd. Prior to the nineteenth century, we burned almost no fossil fuels. Our burning of fossil fuels far exceeds whatever marginal gain in forestland there may have been from pre-Columbian times.

Richard, you sure it was a sawtooth? That's a very unlikely shape for any natural process. Even a triangle wave would be peculiar. I'm thinking the graph had to have taken the shape of a sine wave with perhaps a bit of an offset from the seasonal boundaries, and possibly some skewing.

Fred:I hope emotional logic works well for you in life. I find it a bit lacking, but if it floats your boat, I am happy for you.

How do you explain that the atmospheric concentration of CO2 is greater on the west coast than the east coast? (do you know which direction air the mass moves?) In addition to tree-farming and forest regrowth, irrigated agriculture (bread-basket to the world) also sucks up megatons of CO2.

Google Dyson and global warming. He is a big brained liberal not tied to corporate evil.

How do you explain that the atmospheric concentration of CO2 is greater on the west coast than the east coast?

You know, for a bunch of people who discount computer modeling and disdain climate models, when you find one study (that even the authors caution was of limited scope), you shed your skepticism very quickly.

You know, for a bunch of people who discount computer modeling and disdain climate models, when you find one study (that even the authors caution was of limited scope), you shed your skepticism very quickly.

You know, for someone who doesn't even understand the fundamental laws of thermodynamics, you are a pretentious know-it-all.

The N Amer CO2 sink is not all about modeling and all models are not bullcrap. Your argument is equal to saying that since someone is repulsed by sex with children, then they must also be repulsed by sex between consenting adults.

When a GCM can predict El Nino, La Nina, PDO, the ADO the MWP and the LIA, then they might be useful.

"Dr. Fan, the lead author of last years study, defends his groups study, however. He has argued that his findings are based in part on atmospheric samples and not just on models (Electricity Daily, August 3, 1999). Fans group used carbon dioxide levels from 63 ocean-sampling stations. They took into account ocean uptake and wind currents and found that as air currents move from west to east across North America, there is a slight decrease in carbon dioxide concentrations. The Woods Hole researchers admit that their model does not take into account soil sequestration."

How does Gore use our Trillions of dollars going into UN's hands to govern the Sun? My guess is he will find another use for it over at World Government Headquarters. Now if every one will just agree to pretend you are guilty, as you want to feel, we will proceed. Now on the count of three , wake up and accept your new masters.

Can you explain that to Gore then? Perhaps he will quit thinking the only energy input into the system called Earth comes from humans burning fossil fuel. That would be the first step in understanding how little human input has in the temperature of the Earth.

That reminds me: ever get around to apologizing to the people you accused of being liars for trying to educate you?

That's rich. I am routinely called a liar, traitor, unAmerican, and all kinds of names here. Yet I don't think anyone has ever apologized or even admitted that I was correct when I have provided ample proof that I was correct in my assertions.

dbp said... People take Gore very seriously. People who have achieved high stations in life. And yet to me, it is obvious that Gore is a charlatan.

Not a charlatan, an alarmist. For now, we honestly don't know if AGW (man-made global warming) is happening vs. the undeniable straight forward, GW trend.

We should, as the saying goes, hope for the best but prepare for the worst. And the debate should be about if we are being driven into needless self inflicted wounds by Global Warming activists in positions of power, who have undeniably tried to force down our throats many stupid measures having little to do with abating GW - while still thwarting CO2-free nuke plants and turning a blind eye to 3rd World population explosion and coal burning.

jdeeripper is correct in that the focus on GW or AGW is distracting us from the present danger of ecological collapse in many regions of the world that not only enganger humans, but threaten a new wave of mass species extinction. And most of those collapses are happening in regions The Goreacle would call exemplary in their low carbon use - 1. Deforestation of Pakistan, the Sahel, the Ethiopean highlands, the Amazon Basin, Indonesia.2. Destruction of water acquifers in the ME, Peru, Iran, China, India, and Bangladesh - mainly from overpopulation - causing salinification of arable land..or outright poisoning by selenium or man-made pollutants.

*************That's rich. I am routinely called a liar, traitor, unAmerican, and all kinds of names here. Yet I don't think anyone has ever apologized or even admitted that I was correct when I have provided ample proof that I was correct in my assertions.

The truth hurts. You took it on yourself to be the defender of terrorist "rights" you claim they have.As for your famous series of Freder dissertations into Freder physics and Freder thermodynamics, as opposed to Newtons.....well, some of the best comedy is of the unwitting variety...

The sun warms this globe and the sun right now is cooling this globe. Either way the pure , unadulterated BS that any man made War on the Sun will do anything except rape and pillage the utter fools who are mesmerized by Guilt and absolution speeches coming out of the Masters of the Universe over at World Government Headquarters, is total Delusion. Anyone who pushes this evil plot is forever identified as your worst enemy. There, you have been told.